Drone Again Spotted at Brussels Airport, Detected Digitally
A drone was sighted near Brussels Airport in Zaventem for the second consecutive evening on Saturday, and this time the aircraft was not only seen by eye but also registered digitally by air traffic control detection equipment. Air traffic controller Skeyes confirmed the sighting, which marks a notable shift from the purely visual reports that have characterised a series of drone incidents around the Belgian capital’s main airport. The matter remains under investigation, with no operator identified.
What Happened
According to Skeyes spokesperson Kurt Verwilligen, the drone was observed at around 20:00 on Saturday. “We saw the drone not only visually, but also have a digital registration of the incident. That happened with our detection equipment,” Verwilligen told HLN.
The digital registration is the distinguishing feature of Saturday’s incident. On the previous evening, Friday 11 September, a drone was spotted by both a traffic-control supervisor in the tower and staff from Brussels Airport’s own security service — but only by eye. Because that drone was seen in a risk zone around the runways, Skeyes activated its so-called “Rogue Drone Procedure.”
That procedure, developed partly in response to the major drone disruptions at Gatwick Airport in the United Kingdom, allows controllers to shift operations to another runway rather than shut the entire airport. “When a drone enters a dangerous zone around a runway, we close that runway and try progressively to move operations to another,” Verwilligen explained to RTL Info.
On Friday, the first alert came at around 21:45. Between roughly 21:50 and 22:10, no aircraft were able to land. Incoming flights bound for runways 25R and 19 were placed in a holding pattern, circling above the airport. Three flights were ultimately diverted — two to Ostend and one to Liège — and the disruption lasted around 30 minutes.
Conflicting Accounts
Saturday’s incident produced a discrepancy between the two organisations responsible for the airport. Skeyes confirmed the sighting and, according to RTBF, operations resumed at 20:20 after the half-hour interruption required between a report and a restart under the Rogue Drone Procedure.
Brussels Airport, however, told VRT NWS that its services received no notification of a possible drone that day and that there were no diversions or delays. Airport spokesperson Quentin Mertens also said police attended the scene to establish the facts.
Skeyes stresses that the absence of disruptions does not mean no drone was present. The severity of a report depends heavily on where the drone is flying: a device spotted far enough from sensitive zones does not necessarily require a halt to air traffic.
The contradictory accounts highlight a persistent challenge in Belgium’s drone response: determining what actually happened, and who is responsible for saying so. Skeyes handles flight safety; identifying the drone and its operator is a task for the federal police or other competent authorities. “The last thing we want to do is completely shut down the airport,” Verwilligen said.
Why It Matters
The second-night sighting lands amid a broader and still unresolved debate about drones over Belgium. The country experienced a wave of sightings beginning in early October 2025, above military bases and airports, culminating in the full shutdown of Brussels Airport on 4 November 2025 after three drones were observed. That episode cancelled 16 departing Brussels Airlines flights and forced aircraft to divert to Ostend-Bruges, Charleroi, Eindhoven and Lille.
In response, Defence Minister Theo Francken approved a counter-drone plan and mobilised about EUR 50 million urgently for detection equipment and anti-drone weapons — without a public tender and overriding a negative opinion from the Finance Inspectorate.
A subsequent Pano investigation published in April 2026 found no evidence of hostile drones above Belgium, half a year after the crisis. Similar investigations in Germany, Denmark and Norway also found no evidence of Russian involvement. The federal prosecutor’s office has 26 investigations into around 40 incidents still running, according to spokesperson Yasmina Vanoverschelde.
The technical difficulty of detecting drones is central to the confusion. As a VRT NWS explainer noted, no single system can spot every drone: radio-frequency detection catches roughly 95 percent of today’s drones but is blind to those flying on 4G or 5G; airport radar is designed for aircraft and struggles with non-metallic materials; acoustic systems work only to about 200 metres; and optical systems rely on AI-driven cameras. At high-criticality infrastructure, Belgium combines all four — but not everywhere, because a radar system can be 10 to 100 times more expensive than radio-frequency detection.
Saturday’s digital registration is therefore significant: it provides a concrete data point rather than only a visual sighting, potentially strengthening the credibility of the report and aiding the investigation.
What to Watch
No link has been established between the Friday and Saturday incidents, and the drone’s origin remains unknown. Key questions remain: whether the digital registration leads to an identified operator, whether the two consecutive evenings point to a pattern, and how the recurring incidents will shape a political debate already coloured by controversy over unproven threats and no-tender spending.
For now, Skeyes’ core message stands: a quiet night at the airport does not prove the skies were clear — and the tools meant to tell the difference are still catching up to the threat.